ultra portable point and shoot cameras

[ZippyDan]

im looking to buy a new point and shoot camera soon

all reviews and opinions seem to point to the Fuji F31d (and related models) as the best for overall image quality and low lighting conditions

i have however a couple of hangups:

aesthetics
portability
zoom

i would like, but do not require, more than a 3x zoom

a mostly pointless care: i dont really like the way the fuji camera looks

a more practical care again from a form perspective: the fuji looks rather thick compared to many slim cameras available these days. i want something that is as portable as possible (while still maintaining a respectable level of quality)

as an example, ive always liked olympus point and shoot cameras for 3 reasons:

looks: always attractive (imo)
size: fairly thin
purchase: Costco sells them

but there are even thinner cameras that ive seen

unfortunately it seems great review sites like dpreview.com dont do enough reviews to cover these cameras. most of the good review sites with good reviews seem to focus on the higher end (bulkier) cameras. i need more (trustworthy, expert) reviews on some of these more portable cameras, like for example the Olympus cameras

im looking at the FE-240 right now that has a 5x zoom for instance. but i know zoom can be fairly useless without some quality image stabilization...

anyone?

 

[msarp]

I have the F31d which I love it. It is not the most attractive camera but it sure is hard to beat.
As for the FE-240 overall no image stabilization you be a problem , the delay in between shot time this model has and no burst mode, I suggest you get your hands on one to test to make sure it is what you want. I also have a Cyber-shot DSC-S700 . Look into that. It fits your description. It does only have a 3x zoom but I have no problems with this. I take it everywhere.
Hope this helps

 

[ElFenix]

the fuji is 8 mm thicker than the SD1000, but only 2 mm thicker than the SD850


'zoom' means nothing. even '3x' zoom really doesn't say anything. for example, the panasonic FX-07 isn't really any more telephoto than the canon SD1000 (102 vs 105 mm), but is a 3.6x zoom because it starts at a proper wide angle of 28 mm (vs 35 on the canon). it also (for the same price as the canon) has optical image stabilization.

 

[40Hands]

I never understood the idea of people not buying something based on aesthetics. Are you worried that people will look at it and go "ugh...what a ugly camera!"? I couldn't care less about how a device looks as long as it works as intended.

 

[RedWolf]

Take a look at the F40FD from Fuji. It is smaller than the F31, uses SD cards, and looks better, too. Personally, I see no reason to go with Olympus. They use XD cards which are slower, smaller, and cost more than SD cards. The image quality isn't as good as Fuji, either.

If you want small, take a look at Casios S770. The image quality isn't fantastic but it is decent (certainly good enough for 4x6 prints). I have an S600 and it is tiny compared to the Canon SD400 I have. It is only a little larger than the motorola razr.

If you want a larger zoom than 3x you're going to have to go to something like the Panazonic TZ3. It's big compared to the F31 but it has a 10x optical zoom. Kodak makes a smaller camera with a 10x zoom (V603, iirc) that is pretty small, too. The TZ3 is an excellent camera and the Kodak is decent.

 

[ZippyDan]

Originally posted by: 40Hands
I never understood the idea of people not buying something based on aesthetics. Are you worried that people will look at it and go "ugh...what a ugly camera!"? I couldn't care less about how a device looks as long as it works as intended.

same reason people like cool looking phones and cars genius pants...

i would say size (slimness) is more important than the looks because im looking for portability. but i do appreciate a neat looking piece of technology, and it just so happens that the smallest cameras also generally tend to look the coolest...

 

[40Hands]

Originally posted by: ZippyDan

Originally posted by: 40Hands
I never understood the idea of people not buying something based on aesthetics. Are you worried that people will look at it and go "ugh...what a ugly camera!"? I couldn't care less about how a device looks as long as it works as intended.

same reason people like cool looking phones and cars genius pants...

i would say size (slimness) is more important than the looks because im looking for portability. but i do appreciate a neat looking piece of technology, and it just so happens that the smallest cameras also generally tend to look the coolest...

I guess I just don't really like the idea that tech gear is becoming a fashion statement. People need to get off the looks factor and get to what matters. A great example is a music player that spends 95% of the time in your pocket. Some people wont buy certain ones because they look unfashionable when they have to take them out.

"My god, someone could see me with this! It doesn't even match my shoes!! bah!"

This was not intended as an attack towards you or anyone here!

 

[troytime]

my wife and i both LOVE our sony dsc-t7
(new model is t10 i believe)

i have several friends that have the same thing, they all love it as well

its slim, fits perfectly into a pocket
has the slide lens cover to keep lens protected and clean